We need to discuss the new events in Egypt.I believe the Egyptian ruling group felt that winning Elections by majority is democracy.I think Democracy is an all involving governance based on rule of law. Of course to be able to govern has a prerequisite to be elected by majority.Rule of Law itself should be based on fundamental rights with equality of all not only before law but also in society.

What I want to discuss and understand is weather the Military intervention in Egypt should be welcomed or its a threat to democratic norms in the middle eat?

We need to discuss the new events in Egypt.I believe the Egyptian ruling group felt that winning Elections by majority is democracy.I think Democracy is an all involving governance based on rule of law. Of course to be able to govern has a prerequisite to be elected by majority.Rule of Law itself should be based on fundamental rights with equality of all not only before law but also in society.

What I want to discuss and understand is weather the Military intervention in Egypt should be welcomed or its a threat to democratic norms in the middle eat?

There are no democratic norms in the Middle East. The military intervention had the support of the vast majority of the people, it seems, so it is a popular, as well as military move. Does that make it a true coup? But it is _also_ a threat to Egypt's democratic future, and the next moves of the military powers will tell the story. Will they work to re-establish a new democratic set of elections? Will they install their own "temporary" gov't (to last months? decades?). How long will the military and popular objectives co-align?

And, can any democracy actually exist in a population that systematically abuses and disenfranchises half its population (women)?

It certainly seem like the coup had the support of the majority of Mursi's supporters, but do we really know that? Mursi won the election pretty much fair and sqaure(at least as fair as most democracies in the world are concerened) so a year ago it seemed like he had the majority of the people backing him. Add that analyzists have described the operation as too organised to be something that happened in the spur of the moment. This was something that had been planned for some time and the demonstrations was pretty much the excuse the army needed to dethrone Mursi.

I think the military powers in Egypt will have a lot to say in politics for some time. In many cases I fear the government will only be puppets until they slowly get more and more democrasised. But I'm not too worried about the future of Egypt. They've just gotten rid of a dictatorship. We'd be naive to believe that just after a dictatroship disappears they can have a smooth transition into a democracy. "It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."

Oh we must get together an expeditionary force to save the Egyptians I'm sure they'll have some weapons of mass destruction hidden somewhere let's be philanthropic about the pyramids and save them instead of oil it'll be a longer lasting legacy after all.

No two forms are exactly the same. And as the Middle East has learned for the last several years, revolution doesn't guarantee democracy in the slightest. I think the youth movement that pushed for the original revolution (and you can argue the effect the Facebook movement and such actually had) was naive. There was no plan on what to do following the revolution and overthrow.

Once you tear down all the institutions on the country, what do have to replace them? Who replaces them? What does the replacement system do?

It's messy. And I imagine it will remain so for years, if not decades unless a sense of consistent order is brought about and they transition into democratic ideals.

Definitely a military coup, though the US will not call it such because its $1.3 Billion military support definitely helped this out. It's difficult to tell the difference between a vocal minority, and an overwhelming majority when it comes to protesting in the streets. The fact remains that the military just overthrew a democratically elected government. I have read the justification that since voter turnout was low, the majority of the population didn't actually vote in favour of this government. To me, that's not a valid argument. They had their chance to vote for their leader, chose not to, and now they are stuck with the elected government until the next vote. That's how democracy works. You have the right to vote, but if you don't, that's nobody else's problem but your own. With the military coup, there is little incentive for people to vote again next time. They know their votes don't matter, because the military will just take over again if they don't like what's happening.

Also from what I've read, the military was ready to do this and was just waiting for a "legitimate reason" to do so. It does not appear to be willing to give up power so easily. It will be interesting to see how soon the next elections are scheduled, but when the military is already imprisoning the leaders of the democratically elected political party, it will be hard to call the next election fair. If the election happens at all.

Almost all contributors till now agree that its a Military coup.Will this military intervention help develop mass based popular institutions for the democratic running of Egypt; that too is doubted.I fully agree that no two democracies can be similar; but at least democracies should be all involving, meaning that once elections are over, the elected leaders should take into account the differing voters and broadly their considerations for differing.Development of mass based institutions is another must for the survival of democracies.I beg to inform that Egypt does allow women to vote.It is also to inform that Mursi did win the majority of total voters; i.e. more than 50% of total registered voters.But he remained partisan to his Party (Akhwan ul Musleemen) views and did not include the differing optimisms.I Still feel that there may be many aspects unknown to us and more and detailed contributions on this topic will enlighten.

Almost all contributors till now agree that its a Military coup.Will this military intervention help develop mass based popular institutions for the democratic running of Egypt; that too is doubted.I fully agree that no two democracies can be similar; but at least democracies should be all involving, meaning that once elections are over, the elected leaders should take into account the differing voters and broadly their considerations for differing.Development of mass based institutions is another must for the survival of democracies.I beg to inform that Egypt does allow women to vote.It is also to inform that Mursi did win the majority of total voters; i.e. more than 50% of total registered voters.But he remained partisan to his Party (Akhwan ul Musleemen) views and did not include the differing optimisms.I Still feel that there may be many aspects unknown to us and more and detailed contributions on this topic will enlighten.

Some of this, no doubt, is the people turning on their initial choice when they feel they've 'given him a chance'. I'm not up enough on the meat of last years election to opine on allegations of mass fraud/ballot stuffing.Women having the vote does not mean they are treated equally. When female circumcision is the rule rather than extinct, and when the vast majority encounter sexual predation and assault as a fact of every day life, that's not an equal society.

I would be shocked should true democracy result from yet another military coup in Egypt. While it has been one of the most progressive mid-eastern Muslim nations in recent history (which really is not saying much) it has a long way to go before its is culturally ready to produce democracy. Namely, the oppressive treatment of women, minorities, other religious groups, or those lacking religion.You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan.http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx

Some of this, no doubt, is the people turning on their initial choice when they feel they've 'given him a chance'. I'm not up enough on the meat of last years election to opine on allegations of mass fraud/ballot stuffing.Women having the vote does not mean they are treated equally. When female circumcision is the rule rather than extinct, and when the vast majority encounter sexual predation and assault as a fact of every day life, that's not an equal society.

I agree that despite voting rights to women, they are not treated equally.I know that about 40 to 50% of the female population does have their clitoris circumcised as African tradition & customs.Inequality of women is not only cultural does also has religious enforcement.Still, I believe Egypt is one of the most progressive Muslim countries of Middle East.The latest turn of the situation is really dangerous for Egypt as well as all the regional countries.It appears that the two polarized sections of society are heading towards clashes. In one day over 36 deaths have been reported.With Army backing the anti Mursi faction, it is feared that the country may not land into a civil war.That would surely be a dangerous turn as this civil war may have spill over effects in the region.

What I hope is that countries like USA who is a regular donor of about $ 2 Billions of aid to Egypt should play an effective role andstop the country from going into a civil war.

Even appointment of Mohammad Al Buradi as interim Prime Minister may have a negative effect as Mohammad Al Buradi opposed Mr. Mursi in the run off final round of Presidential elections last year.

I agree that despite voting rights to women, they are not treated equally.I know that about 40 to 50% of the female population does have their clitoris circumcised as African tradition & customs.Inequality of women is not only cultural does also has religious enforcement.Still, I believe Egypt is one of the most progressive Muslim countries of Middle East.The latest turn of the situation is really dangerous for Egypt as well as all the regional countries.It appears that the two polarized sections of society are heading towards clashes. In one day over 36 deaths have been reported.With Army backing the anti Mursi faction, it is feared that the country may not land into a civil war.That would surely be a dangerous turn as this civil war may have spill over effects in the region.

What I hope is that countries like USA who is a regular donor of about $ 2 Billions of aid to Egypt should play an effective role andstop the country from going into a civil war.

Even appointment of Mohammad Al Buradi as interim Prime Minister may have a negative effect as Mohammad Al Buradi opposed Mr. Mursi in the run off final round of Presidential elections last year.

If you consider Egypt as the most progressive muslim country on women's right in the middle east then you need to read up a bit. Lebanon and several others are countries where it's more normal to see women without headgear than with. In several countries of the small oil rich nations you can find women in high positions in companies. Egypt is very very far behind compared to these countries, but who knows, maybe now they'll progress some more. "It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."

Democracy: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority.

Not ours to define in this case. To belittle the revolution that occurred there is presumptuous and duly naive. They took their stand, many have and will die, and US assumptions on the definition of democracy will get in the way, as it has in the past.

If by military intervention, you mean US, no it's not welcomed. If you mean the alleged coup in the country, that's been the norm for ages in that part of the world and is indecipherable by US standards, and even more complicated by US "intervention."

Until we hear from the majority of Egyptians, we can only hazard a guess.

It certainly seem like the coup had the support of the majority of Mursi's supporters, but do we really know that? Mursi won the election pretty much fair and sqaure(at least as fair as most democracies in the world are concerened) so a year ago it seemed like he had the majority of the people backing him. Add that analyzists have described the operation as too organised to be something that happened in the spur of the moment. This was something that had been planned for some time and the demonstrations was pretty much the excuse the army needed to dethrone Mursi.

I think the military powers in Egypt will have a lot to say in politics for some time. In many cases I fear the government will only be puppets until they slowly get more and more democrasised. But I'm not too worried about the future of Egypt. They've just gotten rid of a dictatorship. We'd be naive to believe that just after a dictatroship disappears they can have a smooth transition into a democracy.

Its not really a democracy just because they have elections. is it really fair and square elections when all the high powers are in hands of the government and thats the same government that won?. When there is not real separation of powers isnt it should be concider totalitarism?

I dont concider it a coup, i concider it as the militaries finally saying enough is enough, we wont suopport a dictator anymore.

Its not really a democracy just because they have elections. is it really fair and square elections when all the high powers are in hands of the government and thats the same government that won?. When there is not real separation of powers isnt it should be concider totalitarism?

I dont concider it a coup, i concider it as the militaries finally saying enough is enough, we wont suopport a dictator anymore.

These words, like "democratically elected" and "coup" are so loaded. Mubarak was "democratically elected" for decades on end, but that's not what we 'westerners' really mean by the term, is it? And yes, the Egyptian Army, backed by what's generally accepted to be the majority, did finally have enough of the MoMo Brotherhood Show and decide to shut off the microphones. So, because it was a military overthrow by force, by definition it was a coup d'état, but it's not like this is some power-hungry field general with his merry band of tank drivers. The military removed those in power from it, but the country at large had already removed their legitimacy after Morsi&Co. revealed their own incompetency a few times over.

Regardless of what the U.S. or other countries think about the goings-on in Egypt, the fact is that the Egyptian Military is by far the most trusted entity in the country. From it's early days of independence, through several rulers including Mubarak and to the present day, they're the one constant that has prevailed, that could be depended on. Granted, they were far from perfect in the period between Mubarak and Morsi, but no organization would be, especially under such challenging circumstances. Like the Egyptian people, the military wants stability. Their investments, and thus Egypt's investments, depend on it. They were tired of the Muslim Brotherhood marginalizing secularists and minority faiths, tired of the incompetence, tired of their cronyist actions which directly contradicted their coalitionist rhetoric during their rise to power, and rightfully wary of the Muslim Brotherhood cozying up with jihadist groups here and there, as well as with Iran. Political ties are wrought with hypocrisy, but they're often necessary for prosperity, and losing the support of the Saudis (and others too, down the line) was not an option.

So, "enough", said the military, and the masses cheered, and Muslim Brotherhood loyalists burned down churches and incited violence. Which brings us to the other reality that everyone, regardless of their politics, is coming to understand: violent Islamism flourishes best when they've been marginalized. Even if it was to the majority's benefit to end this particular experiment, the resentment won't go away overnight, and will be repeated elsewhere.

As for Egypt, I saw it written that all of this turmoil concerns their very identity: do they want to self-identify by faith above all else, as the Islamists would have it, or as a nation of free participants, with different lifestyles and shared, treasured values? The more I witness turmoil of this kind, the more I'm skeptical that a nation can really be both.

Wasn't that why they had an election last year? To let the majority say who should rule?

True, but is democracy perfect, and fluid as that? Or do they need to go through some bumps in the road? Lets take the fruition of the birth of a nation. Add in some derisive outside influence, throw in some Mother Earth ideology, make all slaves free to expound on their tribes cultural and spiritual influences. Now, would it be as easy to explain, or comment on?

True, but is democracy perfect, and fluid as that? Or do they need to go through some bumps in the road? Lets take the fruition of the birth of a nation. Add in some derisive outside influence, throw in some Mother Earth ideology, make all slaves free to expound on their tribes cultural and spiritual influences. Now, would it be as easy to explain, or comment on?

Not sure what you are referencing with that. There definitely will be bumps in the road. I would have called Morsi's rule one of those bumps, but also a demonstration to the people of Egypt that their vote matters, and they need to get out and vote. The only lesson they've learned now is that voting doesn't matter, even in a democracy. The people who didn't vote, see that they don't need to, because the military will just overthrow a bad government. For those that voted for the Muslim Brotherhood, you could even take that further. Their opinion doesn't matter. They participated in democracy, only to see the government they elected thrown out after only a year, and their political leaders imprisoned. If that is democracy, will they ever believe/trust in democracy again?

Not sure if there was a trust in democracy, but a hope that something different would prevail. Something unlike control by one tyrant who is controlled by outside influences.

My references are just a mixture of those in revolutionary times in the US. Mother Earth being true native Americans. Outside influence being US. Then other than the rich white dudes, you take in all slaves, Irish, black, and so forth, and allow them a vote at that time. With all those present at that time and with all their beliefs and culture, would it have worked?

We're now forced to accept things as they are with minor political mood swings every four years. This is a volatile situation, like watching if democracy can actually work. Can people rise above themselves or just interpret and administer as they see themselves. A true mirror is that women probably don't have a say. It's a new democracy, it's pure, and volatile.

Lets see what happens. Hope interests from abroad stay out of the way. They've made their own bed.

An important development.USA has suggested the Interim President of Egypt to release Mr. Mursi, the elected President, now under detention of the Military of Egypt.Hope USA making the suggestion to protect & preserve the DEMOCRACY in Egypt.

Morsi was the wrong guy, take it from me this is a great thing! The Army is the vanguard of the Egyptian people. The Muslim Brotherhood is the path to destruction in any civilized nation. They take power at the ballot box then there will not be another election. Women will be second class citizens, people will be subject to brutal sharia law. Take it from the girl who cries as she is watching her country being torn apart by religious fanatics.

Middle eastern countries have a problem catching on to what a free democracy can bring. Egypt is no different. Most if not all dictatorships crumble. A country cannot last with an iron hand or a book of words written by mad men.

Middle eastern countries have a problem catching on to what a free democracy can bring. Egypt is no different. Most if not all dictatorships crumble. A country cannot last with an iron hand or a book of words written by mad men.

I'm curious, what can it bring to Egypt? And what makes you say they haven't caught on to that?

Morsi was the wrong guy, take it from me this is a great thing! The Army is the vanguard of the Egyptian people. The Muslim Brotherhood is the path to destruction in any civilized nation. They take power at the ballot box then there will not be another election. Women will be second class citizens, people will be subject to brutal sharia law. Take it from the girl who cries as she is watching her country being torn apart by religious fanatics.

I am sorry, but the fact is that most of the Middle Eastern countries do have a large following of the religious parties like Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.But that's a ground reality.Can we all, the followers of democracy and fundamental human rights (including rights of women) undo the ground reality?What we can hope and wish is that the democratic rule will usher in the rule of Law which will guarantee equal rights for all, including women.What the Middle Eastern educated middle class could not do (change the will of the people), are we sitting in USA or Europe should force upon the people there?I am sure none here would suggest that, including you.

Middle eastern countries have a problem catching on to what a free democracy can bring. Egypt is no different. Most if not all dictatorships crumble. A country cannot last with an iron hand or a book of words written by mad men.

The main airport in Washington DC is named after the terrorist who snuffed out Iranian democracy and installed a brutal thug who murdered tens of thousands of Iranians until he was deposed by some of the people the CIA used to engineer the coup.

The main reason there is no democracy in the Middle East is that the West and in particular the US has preferred pliable dictators who will supply cheap oil. Saddam Hussein was given lists of opponents to murder, so was the Shah. And when the Iranian people threw off the Shah, the theocratic regime might have been a short lived matter if Hussein had not attacked with Western support.

The US has only become democratic in my lifetime. The 2000 election was decided by a corrupt Governor throwing the vote to his brother and a corrupt Supreme court that blocked the recount on spurious grounds. So please save the lectures on democracy and the patronizing sneers.

Democracy is more than just the ability of white men to choose a white government. It requires democratic institutions and the rule of law. Which was the problem with Mursi, he attempted to put comedians in jail for ridiculing him. He attempted to impose an Islamic constitution that made women second class citizens.

It will take some time to build institutions but any government that comes in has to face the same constraints that brought down Mubarak.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.